Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/4] CPUSET driven CPU isolation

Andrew Morton
2008-02-29T08:33:24Z

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 08:50:11 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:

>
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
>
> > My vision on the direction we should take wrt cpu isolation.
> >
> > Next on the list would be figuring out a nice solution to the
> > workqueue flush issue.
>
> nice work Peter, i find this "system sets" extension to cpusets a much
> more elegant (and much more future-proof) solution than the proposed
> spreadout of the limited hack of isolcpus/cpu_isolated_map. It
> concentrates us on a single API and on a single mechanism to handle
> isolation matters. (be that for clustering/supercomputing or real-time
> purposes)
>
> Thanks for insisting on using cpusets for this!
>
> i've queued up your patches in sched-devel.git, and lets make sure this
> has no side-effects on existing functionality. (it shouldnt)
>

It of course lays waste to a series of cgroup patches from Paul Menage
which I already had queued.

So I shall drop git-sched again.

How often do I have to say this? git-sched is not
git-everything-which-looks-shiny! It is for the CPU scheduler.

If you had put this patchset into a private branch for private testing, or
even into a separate git-petes-stuff then I wouldn't have to collaterally
drop the entirety of git-sched because of this.

Sigh.